Boris B, thank you for enlightening us about the (possible) position of debroah183.
debroah183, I don’t think it’s you ideas that folks are criticizing, it’s your debating style. We don’t like blind assertions (e.g.“G8 protest organizers are misogynists”) around here. Now, if facts or examples were brought foreward, we might have a debate.
She’s got two posts here and one in december’s dopey “Women’s Libbers Denigrate All Men!” thread. There’s a certain sameness to them all.
I don’t think she’s interested in engaging in debate so much as in reeling off the U.S.-Feminism-Circa-1979 buzzwords.
Everybody, I think she’s dead. You can stop shooting at the corpse. :rolleyes:
Please select 2 questions to discuss. Your papers should be 4 pages minimum, double-spaced. Papers are due on the Friday before Thanksgiving break and will be marked down one letter grade for each day late.
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
But…but…that’s…today! A four page paper in one day? No fair!
At least we don’t have to do parenthetical citation…or do we?
Relax - it’s just a dream. Didn’t you notice you’re in your underwear?
everton, Boris B. kindly re-read the thread. deborah183 struck the first blow. She posted her amazingly overbroad and completely non-contextual OP, and four people responded in essentially the same manner - pointing out that the OP was amazingly overbroad and completely non-contextual. Some did it directly, some (like myself) at least tried to do it humorously. None did it “shamefully” or with hostility.
deborah183 then came back with
In this forum, them’s fighting words. This poor defenseless newbie (to take your view of things) chose, in only her second post, to denigrate the denizens of this forum.
She started the fight. I feel that no one who took up her challenge acted shamefully. If she didn’t want a hostile response, then she shouldn’t have acted with hostility in the first place.
Sua
Deborah, I would like you to elucidate. See, the thing is, I do a LOT of “charity” work. And whoever is willing to help…THEY are the people who run things. So, I want to know, WHY were men the ones who were organizing the event? Evidentally, more men than women were willing to volunteer their time and energy. Doesn’t speak well for the women you are so concerned with. Now, maybe the women were there and weren’t being allowed participation, but that isn’t what you said. In my experience, in MY town, women do a great deal of the charity work, and a great deal of the political and social activism organizing. They aren’t complaining about the men, mostly because not that many men are all that involved. And the ones that ARE are not in charge.
Maybe we are more “progressive” here in the PNW? But somehow I doubt it.
Just my view of the situation. Here, at least.
Scotti
It’s NyQuil, darling, and I should know…I have the killer respitory flu, and I am drinking it too. However, you have evidentally had more than I have. 
Sorry, honey…
(I’m SUCH a twit!)
:rolleyes:
I’ve seen that rather often, yes. Among men (and women to a lesser extent) I’ve met or communicated online with who believe in a fundamental way – solid, established fact, accepted starting points for subsequent debates, etc – that racism exists and is a deplorable and unnecessary social construct and is morally indefensible, etc. – and who believe in a similar fashion in the existence and wrongness of religious-group biases, caste and rigid social class stratification and bias, even homophobia and heterosexist bias (although with less uniformity on this one) – there are an astonishing number who dismiss radical feminist analysis and assert one or more of the following:
•That there is no meaningful structural bias or unfairness against women in our (modern western) society;
• or, to put it more strongly, that there is no meaningful structural bias or unfairness against women anywhere, now or historically, except as unimportant anomalies;
• That women who analyze social situations and structures in terms of how they arose from or replicate historically sexist/patriarchal arrangements are either trying to get over in ways they don’t deserve (special treatment in compensation for nonexistent ills) or they have some axe to grind (got PMS / needs a good fuck / hates men personally / is ugly / is sexually repressed / is just plain nuts)
•_That the existence, now or ever, of “patriarchy”, is not a tolerable starting point for discussion or debate, so anyone who asserts it rather than first attempting to establish it is a feminist troll, an academic parrot spewing forth polysyllables that were ingested whole and never thought about in the clear light of day;
• or, to cut to the chase, that there’s no such thing, now or ever, as “patriarchy”, and that people who throw the word around are delusional and laughworthy.
That astonishes me too.
I had no trouble understanding what the OP said. I am often a stickler for semantics, but in this case I have seen it used to dodge the question – beautifully reworded by another poster.
Sexism is so ingrained in our society that many otherwise sensitive and sensible women and men are blind to it.
Just as an experiment, after Thanksgiving why don’t we post here the gender of the person or persons who 1) did most of the cooking and 2) did most of the cleanup.
In light of the OP, it might also be helpful to indicate whether or not you view the members of your family as fairly sensitive to other issues involving equality.
I dare you to be honest about it.
Zoe:
Yeah, Credit Where Credit is Due Department – BorisB, that was exquisitely well done.
Ah, Thanksgiving.
Yes indeed, we finally have the definitive cite, Proof Positive of the sinister face of Misogynistic Patriarchy that looms like a dark cloud over the face of progressive male society.
Thank god for brutal honesty.
Granted. However, the “beautifully reworded” question is this:
The question is based on blatantly false assumptions. Does anyone here honestly believe that, in all of the campaigns and efforts against sexism, men (progressive or not) were not involved?
This is the problem with both the original OP and the revised version. They are based on absolute premises where no absolutes exist…
I see two possible debateable issues arising from the OP:
or, in a different twist
That actually demonstrates little. Cooking and cleaning up are not inherently submissive roles, which is demonstrated when a male does the cooking (my GF’s father cooks a massive multi-course meal for holidays. He is the star of the holiday, not serving a submissive function.)
The better question is, why is cooking considered a submissive role when a woman is the cook?
My family contradicts the OP. The progressives, male and female, are deeply aware of sexual discrimination and gender issues. Most of the conservatives aren’t, although my mother, a conservative in most regards, is a veteran of the ERA wars and otherwise has been heavily involved in campaigns for sexual equality.
I accept your dare.
Sua
Well thanks for the recognition, AHunter3.
I am awaiting the results of Zoe’s bet. I know what’s going to happen at my folks’ house: the men will help out somewhat beforehand, but afterwards the males will be too sleepy to lend anything other than moral support with the dishes.
OK, its a hard one to answer. im not what you would call a progressive man, whatever that means. I think thats where your problem is, you assume because they are “progressive” that they will think and agree with what you believe. Men and women think very differently about some very basic and fundamental things. What pisses you, most guys would just shrug off, but then the reverse is also true. I work in a dept that is pretty much 50/50 in terms of gender, and i see this all the time. a good example … a guy pinned up a pic of some model at his desk, most of the women were pretty pissed about it, so they decided to pin up pics of guys all o0ver the room in retaliation, not one man made any comment about it, it just didnt bother us.
Back to your original question, your expecting them to think in terms of a woman, they cant, any more than you think you can look at things from a mans perspective, i know a lot of women think they know what we are thinking, YOU DONT, dont flatter yourselfs. You dont understand us any more than we understand you, you assume that young boys can be educated to be more feminine, it wont work, all that happens is they get more and more confused. I believe the same as most men i know, there should be equality in terms of race and gender in all things, if thats progressive then fine, but that dosnt mean i wont disagree with you on some gender issues, that dosnt mean i wont face up to my sexism/misogyny, i dont have to, it dosnt exist. It seems to me that your taking the view that if you dont agree with me then your are against me on everything.
rogue
Of course, being Canadian, we already had Thanksgiving, so the answers are
Mostly female (my Mom, with a little help from me)
Two males (Dad and I) and one female (my sister)
“If you cook, you don’t clean” is the law of my household and my parents’ household.
I dunno about other peoples’ childhoods, but if I tried to get away from helping with dinners/cleaning because I’m a male, I would have soon received a swift kick in the ass. That in some families men just ate dinner and didn’t help with prep or cleanup was a revelation to me, because in the J household it was a non-starter.
Originally posted by Sparticus:
A someone who just saw Yes in concert for the 7th time 3 weeks after seeing Rush for the 9th time I resemble that remark.
In my house it will work rather like this:
If you are awake and capable, you will help with food preparation.
If you helped with food preparation, you are deemed fit to help with cleanup.
My mother will then scream that she cannot stand all the helping and evict everyone from the kitchen because she can “do a better job” herself. She will then bitch that nobody tried to help.